Why, oh why, are we still in Iraq? - Page 8

Myrtle · #71 06-22-2005, 10:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are we still in Iraq?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because your average GOP'er would rather see hundreds upon hundreds of American soldiers die than admit that Their Holy Party is in the wrong.

q/q

[/ QUOTE ]

BLASPHEMY!!!!

You'll rot in hell for that statement.

I'll bet you probably believe in that fairy tale called evolution too?!!

kurto · #72 06-22-2005, 11:33 PM

Just curious... your name made me wonder. Have you ever seen quads over quads? (I know I'm not supposed to ask a meaningless poker question)

I've probably seen 100 or so quads since I've been playing, but never I've never seen quads lose yet.

QuadsOverQuads · #73 06-23-2005, 12:37 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Just curious... your name made me wonder. Have you ever seen quads over quads? (I know I'm not supposed to ask a meaningless poker question)

I've probably seen 100 or so quads since I've been playing, but never I've never seen quads lose yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's actually a reference to the first bad beat jackpot I ever hit -- so, yes, I can definitely say I've seen it happen [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

q/q

kurto · #74 06-23-2005, 12:51 AM

Wow. I guess you can rest assured that if odds mean anything, you've experienced a once in a lifetime occurence. You've gotten that out of the way since its not likely to ever happen to you again.

QuadsOverQuads · #75 06-23-2005, 02:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. I guess you can rest assured that if odds mean anything, you've experienced a once in a lifetime occurence. You've gotten that out of the way since its not likely to ever happen to you again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Believe it or not, in the past two years I've not only lost with quads (to higher quads), but I've also beaten quads (with a straight flush). Go figure.

q/q

Cyrus · #76 06-23-2005, 03:12 AM

[ QUOTE ]
A friendly (or friendlier) nation in an area where terrorism breeds.

[/ QUOTE ]
There was no terrorism emanating out of Iraq before America invaded. At the very least, there was no terrorism directed against America.

[ QUOTE ]
A nation that will pursue terrorists instead of paying them.

[/ QUOTE ]

See above.

You are saying essentially that, when "the war in Iraq is over", we will have returned to the pre-invasion status! Because the fact is that secular, anti-fundamentalist Saddam Hussein was not funding anti-American terrorism.

[ QUOTE ]
Iraq would set an example for other tyrannical regimes, especially in the Middle East.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, you wanna utter the words "democracy" and "freedom", I see, only you are doing it in a roundabout way. I told you, this shows you are on the wrong track. This is about the war against terror - not against "tyrannical regimes". When Iraq will be peaceful and stable, what would that do to the religious fundamentalist fanatics that are plotting bad things against the West? Make them put down their weapons and blueprints ?

[ QUOTE ]
Everytime I hear about a car bomb going off, there's a dozen or more civilians killed in the blast. Now that's pretty bad PR for the terrorists, wouldn't you agree?

[/ QUOTE ]
The anti-American sentiments in Iraq, even now, before the "war is won", are running so high that
(a) every time there's a blast that kills civilians, the people blame the Americans and the terrorists at least equally,
(b) Ministers in the current government blame the presence of American troops for the troubles!

[ QUOTE ]
I think other nations will notice how terrorism affects the populations it manifests in and will begin to reject it.

[/ QUOTE ]

But which nation is currently supporting anti-American religious terrorism? Materially, ideologically or otherwise?

The governments of Algeria and Morocco have been engaged in open war against the religious militants in their country, without the need for American prompting, for more than a decade. (If anything, the war in Iraq made things better for the religious militants!)

Egypt has an ongoing jihad against the Muslim Brotherhood, the same folks who assassinated Anwar Saddat. (If free elections were to be held tomorrow in Egypt, the clerics would probably win.) Libya has been a good boy for decades; Qaddafi is not even supporting anti-Israel terrorists. Syria's two Assads have been mortal enemies of Muslim fundamentalism; the father of the current Syrian ruler murdered some 10,000 rebelling Muslims in a single city, if anyone remembers.

Perhaps Saudi Arabia should be persuaded to crack down on religious schools - but this has nothing to do with Iraq and everyhting to do with oil. Wouldn't you agree ?

Arnfinn Madsen · #77 06-23-2005, 08:36 AM

I saw an inteview yesterday with an aid worker who has been there for 2 years and he said that the security situation is now the worst it has ever been. Average Iraqis in Baghdad are afraid when they walk outside. He said that they don't respect Americans, so either training the Iraqi police/army or getting in non-US soldiers is the only solution.

I agree and think that the best would be that US retreated and that EU and Arab League sent soldiers. None of those are ready to do that so probably the best solution is a Afghanistan-model. The US leaves and UN soldiers take control over Baghdad. A new election organized by the UN must be held as the US-organized election will never be fully respected.

I am aware that civil war might break out, but I see no better options.

ptmusic · #78 06-23-2005, 01:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I saw an inteview yesterday with an aid worker who has been there for 2 years and he said that the security situation is now the worst it has ever been. Average Iraqis in Baghdad are afraid when they walk outside. He said that they don't respect Americans, so either training the Iraqi police/army or getting in non-US soldiers is the only solution.

I agree and think that the best would be that US retreated and that EU and Arab League sent soldiers. None of those are ready to do that so probably the best solution is a Afghanistan-model. The US leaves and UN soldiers take control over Baghdad. A new election organized by the UN must be held as the US-organized election will never be fully respected.

I am aware that civil war might break out, but I see no better options.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right on - good thoughts. And you are right to use the word "might" break out. Even if civil war is likely, it is not as likely as the chances of more people dying by the end of this month alone because we are in Iraq (a near lock). And even if civil war is likely if we leave now, it is also likely if we leave at some point in the future. We will never have any assurance of peace when we leave.

A mother who lost her son was interviewed on MSNBC last night. She said that those who are protesting the war are the ones who are supporting our troops the most. It is our government who is not supporting our troops. One reason she suggested for why our government is keeping our troops there is so that we can set up permanent military bases in the area. That's not a good enough reason for all the death.

It's time to bring those troops home.

-ptmusic

jokerswild · #79 06-23-2005, 02:55 PM

The fuhrer has a lot in common with Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini,and Pol Pot, If he believes his own fairytale religion, then he will burn for all eternity.

Myrtle · #80 06-23-2005, 03:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]

A mother who lost her son was interviewed on MSNBC last night. She said that those who are protesting the war are the ones who are supporting our troops the most. It is our government who is not supporting our troops.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would agree with this point of view, but acknowledge that it is probably in the minority.

Why? Most folks don't generally think past the obvious. This was prevalent during Vietnam, and it appears that as a country that we have not learned from that experience.